Kinda makes his comments suspect, doesn't it?
Dan
--
-----------
Thousands of years ago cats were worshipped as gods. Cats have never
forgotten this. -- Danbury Mint
-----------
"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote in message
news:ujzni8bGIHA.4228@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> "The Symantec Corporate installations are pirated."
> Am I missing something?
> Or are you admitting to theft?
>
> --
> Jupiter Jones [MVP]
> http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
> http://www.dts-l.org
>
>
> "Virus Guy" wrote in message
> news:47251C38.EFE7D73B@Guy.com...
> > RJK wrote:
> >
> >> ...above this post a little, you said that you are yourself
> >> using an older version of NAV,
> >
> > I manage about a dozen PC's. On most of them, I either have NAV
> > 2002,
> > or Symantec corporate (version 8 I think). I've only ever paid for
> > 1
> > copy of NAV 2002, and that was at a swap meet in 2003. The Symantec
> > Corporate installations are pirated.
> >
> > On my own 2 PC's, I've allowed my NAV 2002 to expire (I've
> > uninstalled
> > them to stop them from nagging me about their expired status). All
> > it
> > takes to re-activate them is to copy the file
> > "catalog.livesubscribe"
> > from any of the other systems that haven't expired yet.
> >
> > I also run a real time registry monitor made by "The Cleaner" (also
> > a
> > bootlegged copy).
> >
> >> ...here on this part of this thread - you pointed out that viruses
> >> like "storm" have been deactivating AV programs,
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> >> ...so you are aware of this danger, and yet you are using an
> >> ancient a/v program !
> >
> > The age of the program is not relavent - and might even be an
> > advantage. The Storm "thing" has a built-in list of process names
> > that it looks for. Using an old (ancient) piece of AV software
> > might
> > be an advantage - assuming that the same process name isin't being
> > used in more modern versions. And even though NAV 2002 is old, it
> > updates itself via Symantec's "LiveUpdate" with the most current
> > virus
> > definitions and scan engine.
> >
> >> ...malware that's programmed to deactivate AV software is just
> >> one of the reasons that many major AV application software
> >> vendors, (like AVG), are continually modifying their core
> >> files !
> >
> > What they need to do is give their program modules different names
> > (random process names) so that things like Storm can't identify them
> > at run time.
> >
> >> ...and this is one aspect of the "preventing malware /
> >> multi-layered internet security approach,"
> >
> > I run win-98 on my systems. That's the most effective "layer" going
> > (besides running Linux or Mac OS I guess).
> >
> > It's a lot harder to run a root-kit on Windows 9x, and it's a way
> > easier to identify, and delete malware on a win-98 box (fat-32 makes
> > things easier compared to NTFS). In the 8 years we've been running
> > win-98 on most of our systems, I think there have only been 2
> > infections, and those were prior to 2004. In fact, our win-98
> > systems
> > were directly facing the internet (no firewall, no NAT router) up
> > until the end of 2005 and none were ever hit with a network worm,
> > port-scan, etc. We've had about 1/2 dozen occurrances of malware on
> > our handful of NT and 2K machines over the same time frame.
>